List Mgmt. 2013 DRAFT

[Matty411]

Yeah fair call re Cain. Think my sentiments a more based around him deserving a shot at the AFL (not nec with Carlton). Think a Lambert or Gibbons would be the way to go for sure. Do we all agree that other two spots should be for a KPF and ruck prospect?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bmaurizio]

Templeton to add to mid depth too & Brett Jones great size 204 cm I think
to the ruck depth , if we miss out on Cameron or Conlon
Ciao

 

[Aphrodite]

Well what do you know!

 

[etsal1]

What a shame.

 

[Jeremias]

Should have taken him with pick 39.....................................................

 

[Aphrodite]

Should have taken him with pick 13.....................................................

*EFA

 

[Matty411]

Interesting but not overly surprising. The whole culture push backs this up - whilst he deserves a 2nd chance, I'll support our club all the way if they don't think he'll fit in with the group.

So Hourigan for a rookie spot?

 

[C4[2]Yo`DooR]

pfftttt what would Landsberger know.

 

[Keyza]

Snoop's phantom is up. Has us taking the same players (cavarra, thorp, lambert)

Has Tsitas sliding to pick 68. I thought an outside player with good skills, fierce tackling and a superlative beep test would rank higher. Doesn't rate Templeton either.

Having Battersby, D Cameron, Spencer, Hourigan and Conlon gone before our pick doesn't inspire confidence.

Why dont we participated in the PSD then? We can go 39/5 and have only one nominated rookie, this way we can get one of these kids. Surely the difference to the salary cap isnt that much different if we add another onto the senior list, these kids are only on around $50,000 and rookies a bit less. I know half of rookies salaries are not included in the cap but surely we are not that close to it that we cant find room.

 

[Azul]

Why dont we participated in the PSD then? We can go 39/5 and have only one nominated rookie, this way we can get one of these kids. Surely the difference to the salary cap isnt that much different if we add another onto the senior list, these kids are only on around $50,000 and rookies a bit less. I know half of rookies salaries are not included in the cap but surely we are not that close to it that we cant find room.

Who knows? A team that finishes 9th on the ladder and hasn't made the top 4 since 2000 hasn't earned the right to be paying 100% of the salary cap. But I understand the introduction of 2 expansion clubs plus the threat of free-agency have exaggerated salaries. Plus, one of our highest paid players is now a 26yo mate of Mick's with a dodgy ankle.

 

[Silvagnis]

Snoop's phantom is up. Has us taking the same players (cavarra, thorp, lambert).

Capybara for Carlton and XXX KINGS ?

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/capybaras.395950/

 

[Azul]

Shallow draft and all but it means we risk out on a promising kid with the 14 live selections after our pick 51. One might well say we didn't rate Amon or Marsh but we forgo the first dozen gems in the rookie draft and still have 3 picks left.

 

[Azul]

I met a capybara roaming the bank of a stream once. They're called 'carpincho' in Uruguayan Spanish.

 

[kreuze95]

 

[coryne]

Did Rogers just admit that they recruited a player that the club didn't rate in the top 15 in the draft ???


I thought we ALWAYS draft players we thought would go A LOT higher than where we got them ??? .................... hehe



Also bugger this "looking after" the new recruits, get them into some boxing exercises (I hear Everit goes OK in the ring, maybe he could give them a lesson )

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Did Rogers just admit that they recruited a player that the club didn't rate in the top 15 in the draft ???

We rated Giles at #16 and Holman at #17.

 

[Azul]

Did Rogers just admit that they recruited a player that the club didn't rate in the top 15 in the draft ???

Well, they may have rated Giles at 16 for all we know.

Best available at pick 13, needs at 39.

'Ginger' also wanted to temper expectations of Cripps in his first year and that Holman and Giles were more AFL ready - skeptics like me (would have taken Cam McCarthy!) were given the explanation that the reason he was slow, carrying puppy fat and lacking endurance was that he suffered a broken leg last year. Hence he can only get better in 2015 after a couple of preseasons!

 

[Silvagnis]

I guess Rogers rated Giles more than four of the above boys.

Wry smile before answering the Giles question.

 

[LanceRomance]

Wry smile before answering the Giles question.

Wouldn't be surprised if Giles was a special pick that Rogers made himself. Seemed very pleased with that selection.

Hopefully, we have been rogered just right.

 

[etsal1]

Wouldn't be surprised if Giles was a special pick that Rogers made himself. Seemed very pleased with that selection.

Hopefully, we have been rogered just right.

Poster on the rumours thread on the Draft board said we will take Giles with 39 if he was there before the draft. Apparently his source had inside info from the presentation the recruiters gave to the board. Reckon Giles was our number 1 choice for 39 and Rogers is just very happy he lasted

So am I.

 

[coryne]

That's not what he said at all when referring to Giles.

What he was alluding to was that he rated three talls and was happy to get one of them by #39.
Others may have been McCarthy, Apeness, Gardiner, Lobb, Nankervis or McStay but they were gone in the top 20
I guess Rogers rated Giles more than four of the above boys.

EDIT: If we didn't know beforehand we do now. We don't recruit purely on best available.........I don't think any club ever really did unless it was just way too good to refuse.

I know HARKER, I was just taking the piss at the fact recruiters generally talk up everyone they grad as bargains which they rated MUCH higher than the selection they used on them (prime examples, Robbo and ROK the year they were drafted)

 

[coryne]

So the draft between 32-39 felll

32. Sydney - George Hewett (North Adelaide) (185 cm)
33. Brisbane - Tom Cutler (Oakleigh Chargers) (190 cm HB)
34. Brisbane - Nicholas Robertson (West Perth) (188 cm)
35. Sydney - Toby Nankervis (North Launceston) (200 cm ruck)
36. Geelong - Jarrad Jansen (East Fremantle) (189 cm HBF)
37. Fremantle - Alex Pearce (Devonport) (197 cm beanpole)
38. Hawthorn - Dayle Garlett (Swan Districts)

Round 3
39. Carlton - Cameron Giles (Woodville)


So can we call it, we got Everitt for a pick downgrade and got our man anyway ???

 

[etsal1]

Although Rogers said we rated 3 talls for pick 39 - I'm thinking Giles was rated first. We knew McCarthy would be gone, so I doubt he would have been 1 of the 3 and given the info posted on the draft & trading board, I'm thinking we had our hearts set on Giles. And why wouldn't we?

 

[ianh]

Although Rogers said we rated 3 talls for pick 39 - I'm thinking Giles was rated first. We knew McCarthy would be gone, so I doubt he would have been 1 of the 3 and given the info posted on the draft & trading board, I'm thinking we had our hearts set on Giles. And why wouldn't we?

Perhaps because structurally we needed a ruck/forward like Ben Brown more than a KD-cum-swingman. I have high hopes for Giles, however I would have far preferred brown at that pick just on a needs basis.

 

[Azul]

It's a question of upside. Ben Brown is nearly 3 years older than Giles and was passed over 3 years in a row.